Obama: I’ll “vigorously” pursue a “meaningful” assault-weapons ban

posted at 4:31 pm on January 14, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite and NBC, a reminder to his base that he’d like to Do Something even though everyone realizes by now that very little will be Done. Quote:

President Barack Obama on Monday acknowledged that full implementation of his expected gun control proposals may be stonewalled in Congress but pledged to “vigorously pursue” recommendations from an administration task force, including a “meaningful” assault weapons ban.

“What you can count on is that the things that I’ve said in the past – the belief that we have to have stronger background checks, that we can do a much better job in terms of keeping these magazine clips with high capacity out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them, an assault weapons ban that’s meaningful – those are things I continue to believe make sense,” Obama said during the final press conference of his first term.

The key word is “meaningful.” If the new proposed AWB is anything like the old AWB, it’ll amount to a ban on scary-looking semiautomatic rifles, forcing America’s mass shooters and gang members t simply arm themselves to the teeth with semiautomatic pistols (or black-market semiautomatic rifles, of course) instead. Frank Fleming floats a compromise plan: For all the good that a new assault-weapons ban would do, why not just have the House and Senate pass strict new regulations on weapons that don’t exist?

What we can do is pass a law banning a bunch of made-up things that sound scary, and many gun control proponents already have great ideas along this line. For instance, I read a column in which Howard Kurtz mentioned a ban on high-magazine clips — we can certainly do without something that nonsensical. And I’ve heard the press before mention armor-piercing hollow points and plastic guns (actually, I think we already banned that made-up weapon in the ’80s). And as long as the NRA and Wayne LaPierre go apoplectic about it (“This ban on sorcerer-enchanted guns is just a slippery slope toward eliminating all witch-hexed weaponry!”), gun control proponents won’t know the difference between this and actual gun control. And this will help protect our most vulnerable people out there: politicians. Because long after the gun control advocates move on to other things, like who they want to tax next, gun owners will still be annoyed by any actual gun control legislation. One of the greatest fears politicians have is seeing an angry guy with lots of guns charging down the street, because they know he’s probably on his way to commit an act of voting.

Chuck Schumer sent a letter to gun retailers this weekend asking them to suspend sales while Congress hashes this out, which sounds insane given how high demand is right now but makes sense in the context of administration cronyism. The White House has shown it’s not above cutting deals that benefit big business when passing new regulations; if Walmart plays nice with Schumer and Obama now, they may benefit in whatever bill eventually comes to the Senate floor this month or in the future, when Democrats are in a better position to pass something.

Exit question via ABC and National Journal: Why is Obama risking so much political capital on gun-control legislation when nothing major will pass and it risks becoming a distraction for his second term? He’s going to ask purple-state Senate Democrats to take tough votes on Chuck Hagel and immigration reform. Why make them take one on gun control too? The answer, I think, is that the Hagel and immigration votes aren’t as tough as people think. Hagel will get a few Republican votes, and in any event public ire over cabinet appointments rarely lasts. Immigration is dicier but that’ll get some GOP support too after November’s drubbing among Latinos. In fact, I’m curious to see how far grassroots conservatives are willing to go this time in punishing congressional Republicans for voting yes on a multi-step amnesty. Is that primary-worthy, or have changing demographics now reached the point where the optics of trying to oust a Republican for supporting an immigration bill are too dangerous?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Is that like the “aggressive negotiations” with Iran that he promised during his debates with McCain in ’08? Hopefully it will be as successful.

Flange on January 14, 2013 at 4:32 PM

What a bolt action dolt

can_con on January 14, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Exit question via ABC and National Journal: Why is Obama risking so much political capital on gun-control legislation when nothing major will pass and it risks becoming a distraction for his second term? He’s going to ask purple-state Senate Democrats to take tough votes on Chuck Hagel and immigration reform. Why make them take one on gun control too?

Well, they all voted for Obamacare and Porkulus, and hardly any of them paid a political price for it when seeking reelection. Hell, last week there was a report that Al Franken may not even be challenged in his bid for a 2nd term next year. At this point, do Democrat Senators in all but the reddest of states have anything to fear?

Doughboy on January 14, 2013 at 4:36 PM

I’ll “vigorously” pursue a “meaningful” assault-weapons ban

Like he vigorously pursued the Benghazi thugs? The Fast and Furious goons…if only he would use the same “vigor”.

right2bright on January 14, 2013 at 4:36 PM

which sounds insane given how high demand is right now

No kidding…

There were enough guns sold in the US in November and December to outfit each active member of the Chinese and Indian armies with a brand new gun.

Weight of Glory on January 14, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Forget about it… He is just throwing red meat to his lunatic communist base…

mnjg on January 14, 2013 at 4:39 PM

…Hey JugEars!…STFU!

KOOLAID2 on January 14, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Was there any talk about using a……… Laser Focus?

Where’s Boobs Biden ?

FlaMurph on January 14, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Just like he said he’d focus like a lazer on the economy?
Or close Gitmo?
Or taxes wouldn’t go up?
or you could keep your doctor?
or if the economy didn’t improve he shouldn’t be re-elected?

LincolntheHun on January 14, 2013 at 4:41 PM

216,207 have sent so far “Ruger Rocks”

http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/#

Texyank on January 14, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Anything to keep from being laser focused on the economy.

Lap it up LSM.

antipc on January 14, 2013 at 4:42 PM

perfect!!! burn up that political capital on an issue that you can’t win. after your big gun announcement tomorrow, your decline will begin before you even get inaugurated!

burserker on January 14, 2013 at 4:44 PM

I’ll “vigorously” pursue a “meaningful” assault-weapons ban

And those evil Republicans obstructed my efforts.

BacaDog on January 14, 2013 at 4:44 PM

If it looks like a Squirrel, talks like a Squirrel, etc. ,

Then guess what ?

FlaMurph on January 14, 2013 at 4:45 PM

What if a President signed an ILLEGAL Executive Order and 10′s of millions of Americans didn’t comply?

He wants chaos so bad you smell it on him.

katy on January 14, 2013 at 4:45 PM

Alderman Bob Fioretti (2nd) joined Good Day Chicago to speak on the chances of something like this passed.

“Obviously we are very restricted in terms of the rights that we look at gun ownership in the city. Obviously it will pass, but the question gets to be the practical implications of it,” Fioretti said. “If we’re serious about going after it, by extending the time to allow six months in jail for illegal gun control, illegal ownership or illegal having a hands gun, most times they look at the police will get prosecuting them understand a felony. The city charges get thrown out.”

This is the level of brain power the gun grabbers can muster when they really try.

The Fox News reportage is no better.

“What a bunch of dolts,” -Buck Ofama (R-Pennsyltucky)

Akzed on January 14, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Wow, these folks are sure to be disappointed when they find out what an assault rifle is. Of course inventing the term assault weapon was a confusing way for them to go in the first instance.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

Exit question via ABC and National Journal

Nothing of the sort–he plans on both via ‘executive fiat.’ Nothing more, or less.

jersey taxpayer on January 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

You’re arming the Muslim Brotherhood and you’re going to deny us the right to arm ourselves? You miserable seditious little POS.

rrpjr on January 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

I propose we ban the sale and possession of all neutron bombs, phasers, disruptors, and theyleron radiation weapons – cuz any fan of the SyFy channel knows a psycho could kill thousands or even millions of people with those. Do this and we’ll all be safe in happy unicorn rainbow land.

dentarthurdent on January 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

AP,

When has the SCOAMF shown the least concern for ANYONE in either the Senate or the House beyond his two presidential sponsors, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi?

I am not trying to be snarky here. Bob Woodward painted Obama as the Anti-Schmoozer – the fellow who never reaches out to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

PolAgnostic on January 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

*yawn*

BigGator5 on January 14, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Too bad bho hasn’t given a ‘meaningful’ budget for the last five years on time? bho has so many distractions he spews out daily, it is hard to keep up with them! And none of them will do squat FOR our nation!

bho is a wanna-be little ‘h’ guy and he telling us so with every lying word out of his mouth.
L

letget on January 14, 2013 at 4:52 PM

You’re arming the Muslim Brotherhood and you’re going to deny us the right to arm ourselves? You miserable seditious little POS.

rrpjr on January 14, 2013 at 4:48 PM

Apparently he doesn’t want us law-abiding peon US citizens to be able to defend ourselves against the Muslims or the Mexican drug cartels.

Of course once “assault weapons” are banned, the criminals will just buy them from Mexico. I’ll bet the drug cartels are perfectly willing to expand into the black market gun trade.

dentarthurdent on January 14, 2013 at 4:52 PM

President Barack Obama … pledged to “vigorously pursue” recommendations from an administration task force, including a “meaningful” assault weapons ban.

Does anyone in his base know the song “We Won’t Get Fooled Again”? No? OK, just checking…

apostic on January 14, 2013 at 4:53 PM

Say what you want about the birther stuff but the optics wouldn’t allow Obama to make these naked assaults on the Constitution while he’s on the defensive about his constitutional eligibility to be president. He thinks that’s all behind him, now, thanks to the Republican cowards, so he can crack his knuckles and get down to business.

Buddahpundit on January 14, 2013 at 4:53 PM

If you are going to break the law and purchase an illegal assault weapon, why not just break the law and purchase an illegal assault rifle?

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 4:54 PM

I think we should ban plasma pistols and those energy swords that you can use in HALO.

I hate them things…./

ted c on January 14, 2013 at 4:55 PM

I’m of two minds on this. The first is that Obama’s not risking a thing. This latest 15 Minute Hate, like all the others, simply deflects attention from his miserable failures. No one is talking about the crushing debt or Ambassador Steven’s assination any more. The second is that it’s part of the Progressive Democrat plan to destroy the Republican Party. Too many Republican stalwarts and independent voters are sick to death of the establishment RINOs that infest the party. If they were to surrender to the statist bastards one of our most basic Constitutional and human rights, the GOP may as well disband.

RobertE on January 14, 2013 at 4:55 PM

I’m not saying I would break the law. I don’t need to.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 4:56 PM

I’d humbly suggest that we voluntarily ban both the “M41-A Pulse Rifle” as well as the “XZ-35 Rocket pistol“.

See? Compromise.

JustTurnRight on January 14, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Does anyone in his base know the song “We Won’t Get Fooled Again”? No? OK, just checking…

apostic on January 14, 2013 at 4:53 PM

I became an even more dedicated fan of The Who when it was reported they refused to let Michael Moore use that song for one of his trash documentalies.

dentarthurdent on January 14, 2013 at 4:56 PM

At the risk of upsetting clingers I really think we need to ban unicorn team served firearms. Weapons that fire highly explosive rainbow farts should only be used on the field of battle.

CorporatePiggy on January 14, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Remember, four boxes keep us free:
the soap box, the ballot box,
the jury box, and the cartridge box.

…and a cedar box, as Bmore would say.

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Molon labe.

Rixon on January 14, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Will phasers, disrupters and blasters be banned as well?

Rixon on January 14, 2013 at 4:57 PM

those are things I continue to believe make sense,”

Nothing else matters.

BobMbx on January 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Will magazine clips be part of the legilation? I surely hope so. Because the ability to clip magazines together sounds awful scary, and should be kept out of the hands of crooks. Think of much faster and more efficient your coffee table or bathroom basket will be with high capacity magazine clips.

This was an unusually high degree of talking out of the 4th point of contact, even by this President’s standards.

Sgt Steve on January 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Reid ‘shoots down’

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM

If we do not choose a hill to die on, the left will choose a ditch for us to die in.

$hit that I said.

Rixon on January 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM

I think we should ban plasma pistols and those energy swords that you can use in HALO.

I hate them things…./

ted c on January 14, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Light sabers should definitely be illegal – except that a good Jedi makes them from scratch by hand anyway – so there isn’t much commerce to be controlled.

dentarthurdent on January 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Say what you want about the birther stuff but the optics wouldn’t allow Obama to make these naked assaults on the Constitution while he’s on the defensive about his constitutional eligibility to be president. He thinks that’s all behind him, now, thanks to the Republican cowards, so he can crack his knuckles and get down to business.

Buddahpundit on January 14, 2013 at 4:53 PM

That reminds me. Where are the people howling “it’s not a good time to raise the eligibility issue because it may backfire on Romney and repel moderates” last summer? gloating aside, now would be the PERFECT time to revive it. I’m sure Supreme Court Justices know first-hand what happened to John Roberts’s original Ogabecare opinion, and at least four of them itch for a payback.

Archivarix on January 14, 2013 at 5:01 PM

I’ll “vigorously” pursue a “meaningful” assault-weapons ban

And those evil Republicans obstructed my efforts.

Yup. Who can’t see that coming.

I’m not saying I would break the law. I don’t need to. I AM the law!

When ya get right down to his position on the matter.

hawkeye54 on January 14, 2013 at 5:01 PM

if Walmart plays nice with Schumer and Obama now, they may benefit in whatever bill eventually comes to the Senate floor this month or in the future, when Democrats are in a better position to pass something.

The old man dies in his grave, again.

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2013 at 5:01 PM

Looks like CT is trying for most useless gun law so far

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/S/2013SB-00122-R00-SB.htm

Yeah somehow I don’t see any Latin Kings obeying this one.

warren on January 14, 2013 at 5:03 PM

On WallMart:

John Walton did medic tour with S.O.G. units and patched up people wounded in Laos, he in fact was a real good medic.

This was before the money.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 14, 2013 at 5:04 PM

If every legal gun owner just stopped paying their income taxes…

I used to think that people who said that were crazy.

Rixon on January 14, 2013 at 5:05 PM

Looks like CT is trying for most useless gun law so far

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/S/2013SB-00122-R00-SB.htm

Yeah somehow I don’t see any Latin Kings obeying this one.

warren on January 14, 2013 at 5:03 PM

I could see a counter law proposal to restrict the freedom of the press to one letter per printed newspaper page.

Archivarix on January 14, 2013 at 5:06 PM

On the other side of the coin.

What has Mark Levin said and done regarding Obama’s latest lies and his gun grabbing, debt, and amnesty?

http://www.marklevinshow.com

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 14, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Why is Obama risking so much political capital on gun-control legislation when nothing major will pass and it risks becoming a distraction for his second term?

Obama’s not so stupid that he’d put the cart before the horse. His aspirations require a disarmed populace.

Buddahpundit on January 14, 2013 at 5:08 PM

Obama is a con man and he is bluffing.

All talk and no cards.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 14, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Know-Nothing President: Obama wants to limit ‘magazine clips’; Says gun groups use fear to make more money
http://twitchy.com/2013/01/14/know-nothing-president-obama-wants-to-limit-magazine-clips-says-gun-groups-use-fear-to-make-more-money/

Bingo! But, surely the Smartest Man Alive ™ is never wrong! Except when he nearly always is, and today was no different. During President Obama’s surprise press conference, he prattled on about “magazine clips.”

Obama repeats determination to act on guns: magazine clips, assault weapons ban, background checks. Details later in week.—
Bill Press (@bpshow) January 14, 2013

Southern by choice22 on January 14, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Let’s ban stupid politicians . . .

TarheelBen on January 14, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Just gonna increase the collateral damage:

http://www.digtriad.com/news/local/article/263519/57/Man-Crashes-Car-Into-Restaurant-Over-Political-Views

And yes, after some research, (ignored by the media so far) the guy is a democrat. I won’t post the link, because the filter will throw this post in the trash.

LegendHasIt on January 14, 2013 at 5:14 PM

They have to first define the term “Assault Weapon.” The only people that seem to use this term are those that don’t know a damn thing about firearms. If I assault someone with a tire iron, does it not then become an assault weapon? The same with the term “semiautomatic.” Handguns are semiautomatic but that’s not what they’re talking about when they say they want to ban semiautomatics.
These people really need to get their heads out of their asses…

RMCS_USN on January 14, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Via Mediaite and NBC, a reminder to his base that he’d like to Do Something even though everyone realizes by now that very little will be Done.

So, does he make grand promises he can’t keep and then look weak when he back-peddles?

Or does he make grand promises he can’t keep, try to keep them anyway, and provoke a backlash?

It doesn’t look like a winner either way.

tom on January 14, 2013 at 5:17 PM

“What you can count on is that the things that I’ve said in the past – the belief that we have to have stronger background checks, that we can do a much better job in terms of keeping these magazine clips with high capacity out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them

Does he even know that a “magazine” and a “clip” are two different things?

How comforting it is to see that our intellectual betters in government are well-informed on things like THE MOST BASIC FACTS about the objects that they intend to regulate.

Cicero43 on January 14, 2013 at 5:18 PM

‎”All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”

-Mao Tse Tung

The Rogue Tomato on January 14, 2013 at 5:19 PM

What we can do is pass a law banning a bunch of made-up things that sound scary, and many gun control proponents already have great ideas along this line. For instance, I read a column in which Howard Kurtz mentioned a ban on high-magazine clips — we can certainly do without something that nonsensical. And I’ve heard the press before mention armor-piercing hollow points and plastic guns.

Hahah!

Maybe we should add to the list full-auto revolvers and select fire single shot bolt action rifles, That’ll show the NRA!

Galt2009 on January 14, 2013 at 5:19 PM

That reminds me. Where are the people howling “it’s not a good time to raise the eligibility issue because it may backfire on Romney and repel moderates”

Archivarix on January 14, 2013 at 5:01 PM

The birther stuff was at its crescendo in 2010 when the Republicans massacred the Democrats on election day. It was finally put down in 2012 and look what happened on election day. Obama’s no more eligible for the presidency today than he was in 2008, so how do we get scotus to rule on it? Apparently no one has standing, so you could elect Piers Morgan or Vladimir Putin and still no one would have standing to do anything about it, as far as I can tell.

Buddahpundit on January 14, 2013 at 5:23 PM

…and a cedar box, as Bmore would say.

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Pine or cardboard is also acceptable.

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 5:25 PM

“What you can count on is that the things that I’ve said in the past……

All you need to know in fifteen words.

God help me, but I despise this fraud with every fiber of my being.

tru2tx on January 14, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Is that primary-worthy, or have changing demographics now reached the point where the optics of trying to oust a Republican for supporting an immigration bill are too dangerous?

They’re not serving America’s interests if they support an amnesty bill. That’s way different than an immigration bill Allah. You should know better than to pull that.

njrob on January 14, 2013 at 5:28 PM

Does he even know that a “magazine” and a “clip” are two different things?

Cicero43 on January 14, 2013 at 5:18 PM

Hell no. He takes direction from Valerie Jarrett. All his knowledge of anything gun-related comes from discussions with her.

UltimateBob on January 14, 2013 at 5:33 PM

which sounds insane given how high demand is right now but makes sense in the context of administration cronyism.

An excellent article on an important subject, thanks to Matt Lewis, and to AP for the link.

FloatingRock on January 14, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Screw you, Obama, you giant marxist POS.

rayra on January 14, 2013 at 5:34 PM

If 0bama keeps going the way he is, he will get a strongly, worded letter.

Wolftech on January 14, 2013 at 5:40 PM

Rixon on January 14, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Actually you may have inadvertently borrowed it from this guy.

Go find a ditch to die in.
lostmotherland on December 21, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Bmore on January 14, 2013 at 5:41 PM

DOTUS…..

Dictator of the United States.

PappyD61 on January 14, 2013 at 5:48 PM

If you assault someone with a weapon, it thereby becomes a de facto assault weapon.

Which means any weapon can be banned.

O-logic, step one.

If semi-automatic rifles are to be considered assault weapons, all semi-automatic rifles can be banned.

O-logic, part deux.

profitsbeard on January 14, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Obama was asked what he thought about all the crowds at the gun stores buying everything in sight. He said it was al due to the “greed” of the gun manufacturers.

He really loathes private business, and he obviously thinks gun owners are drooling rubes, even though he didn’t say it this time.

juliesa on January 14, 2013 at 5:55 PM

The only thing the president has pursued vigorously are campaign funds, attacking the GOP, and dividing the country.

scalleywag on January 14, 2013 at 6:01 PM

The quickest way to get people to buy or hoard something is to say you’re going to ban it. It’s the president himself who is responsible for the huge crowds at gun shows and the spike in purchases, not gun manufacturers.

scalleywag on January 14, 2013 at 6:05 PM

Hahah!

Maybe we should add to the list full-auto revolvers and select fire single shot bolt action rifles, That’ll show the NRA!

Galt2009 on January 14, 2013 at 5:19 PM

What about banning silencers for revolvers? Wait….that might affect Hollywood in some way.

BobMbx on January 14, 2013 at 6:12 PM

I think we should ban plasma pistols and those energy swords that you can use in HALO.

I hate them things…./

ted c on January 14, 2013 at 4:55 PM

Just leave mah gravity hammer alone, bub.

Midas on January 14, 2013 at 6:15 PM

that we can do a much better job in terms of keeping these magazine clips with high capacity out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them

The “Smartest Man in the World” shows his IGNORANCE once again.

Hey Barry! What’s ‘an assault weapon’?

GarandFan on January 14, 2013 at 6:16 PM

The “Smartest Man in the World” shows his IGNORANCE once again.

Hey Barry! What’s ‘an assault weapon’?

GarandFan on January 14, 2013 at 6:16 PM

SSSHHHHH! Let them put a ban on magazine clips. I don’t own any of those.

BobMbx on January 14, 2013 at 6:19 PM

Who Knew HotAir was using a gun analogy?

blowback (ˈbləʊˌbæk)
— n
1. the escape to the rear of gases formed during the firing of a weapon or in a boiler, internal-combustion engine, etc
2. the action of a light automatic weapon in which the expanding gases of the propellant force back the bolt, thus reloading the weapon.

Oh Barry and his boys are going to be, excuse the phrase “gunning for you” now

stormridercx4 on January 14, 2013 at 6:23 PM

The quickest way to get people to buy or hoard something is to say you’re going to ban it. It’s the president himself who is responsible for the huge crowds at gun shows and the spike in purchases, not gun manufacturers.

scalleywag on January 14, 2013 at 6:05 PM

I kind of chuckled when I heard that Wal-Mart was going to stop selling ammo (is that true, btw?); heck, if you’ve been there looking for ammo, you know they’ve had *none* of consequence for weeks. none that anyone wants anyway (no 22lr, 12g, 9mm, 223, 7.62, etc).

I can find lots of 7mm, 40, 45 etc just about anywhere but the ‘popular’ stuff is *gone*.

Midas on January 14, 2013 at 6:28 PM

Is that like the “aggressive negotiations” with Iran that he promised during his debates with McCain in ’08? Hopefully it will be as successful.

Flange on January 14, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Silly me, I though aggressive negotiations included light-sabers.

Browncoatone on January 14, 2013 at 6:29 PM

They have to first define the term “Assault Weapon.” The only people that seem to use this term are those that don’t know a damn thing about firearms. If I assault someone with a tire iron, does it not then become an assault weapon? The same with the term “semiautomatic.” Handguns are semiautomatic but that’s not what they’re talking about when they say they want to ban semiautomatics.
These people really need to get their heads out of their asses…

RMCS_USN on January 14, 2013 at 5:17 PM

I used to chuckle at the stupidity of these folks (okay, I still do), but I’ve decided that more often than not, the axiom is true: don’t attribute as stupidity that which is more appropriately labeled as malice.

If we think they’re being ‘nebulous’ or ‘imprecise’ because of ‘stupidity’, we might be well advised to consider that they’re doing so rather intentionally, actually, in order to ensnare folks in a wider, nebulous, ‘define it however the hell we want to later’ net of prosecution…

“But, you said “assault weapons”, and “semiautomatics” and said you didn’t mean handguns!”

*smiles*

“Oh, did I say that? And yet here you are with a handgun that *is* a semiautomatic, yes? And the law simply declares “semiautomatics” as banned, does it? Yes, well… you’re under arrest, we can talk about it in court, m’kay?”

Midas on January 14, 2013 at 6:35 PM

Walmart has already buckled. I called their HQ to confirm. They are indeed halting any new orders for ammunition for the time being. I respectfully told them that after many years of defending them from my leftist anti-Walmart crusader, union supporting friends, Walmart has finally given me a reason to stop giving them money.

I’m done.

jawkneemusic on January 14, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Allah when will you stop pushing amnesty rhetoric? Reagan got lesser percentage of the Hispanic vote after signing amnesty than before. Hispanics will NEVER EVER vote Republican until Republicans become a shadow of the Democrats on domestic policy. Oh and stop schmoozing for that slick amnesty salesman Rubio.

flawedskull on January 14, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Walmart has already buckled. I called their HQ to confirm. They are indeed halting any new orders for ammunition for the time being. I respectfully told them that after many years of defending them from my leftist anti-Walmart crusader, union supporting friends, Walmart has finally given me a reason to stop giving them money.

I’m done.

jawkneemusic on January 14, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Good time to go buy ammo at Wal-Mart, then hand the manager a letter explaining that this will be your last purchase until they reverse field.

cane_loader on January 14, 2013 at 6:52 PM

Let’s think positive. Losing Wal-Mart as a large buyer SHOULD bring prices down, overall. More supply on the producer end and losing a big buyer… they need to unload the new ammo somewhere.

Unless demand is already outstripping supply…. oh, wait…..

Heading to Wal-Mart ASAP to check out what’s left.

Is this a nationwide policy by Wal-Mart?

cane_loader on January 14, 2013 at 6:54 PM

This act by Wal-Mart is going to bring the pot to a boil.

Millions of low-info voters are going to be asking why they can’t buy their hunting ammo, as soon as supplies run out.

cane_loader on January 14, 2013 at 6:56 PM

I really wish we had a congress that would vigorously pursue impeachment or charges of treason.

The Rogue Tomato on January 14, 2013 at 7:02 PM

A lame duck before he is even sworn in? With so many Republicans controlling so many states it is going to be a long four years of Red States drilling, fracking, and drawing business from blue states. And Democrats still have more territory to defend than Republicans. And after 8 years of the “Potemkin Presidency” the country, read Democrats that cannot deny the obvious longer, might be inclined to vote for a Republican for POTUS.

Theworldisnotenough on January 14, 2013 at 7:10 PM

Silly me, I though aggressive negotiations included light-sabers.

Browncoatone on January 14, 2013 at 6:29 PM

obozo wasn’t President yet so he didn’t know they don’t exist.

Flange on January 14, 2013 at 7:13 PM

‘The Fedcoats are coming! The Fedcoats are coming!”

rayra on January 14, 2013 at 7:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2